The Development of Prostate Adenocarcinoma in a Transgender Male to Female Patient: Could Estrogen Therapy Have Played a Role?

Prostate Cancer in Transgender Women: Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, and Management Challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To systematically review the evidence on prostate cancer (PCa) in transgender women (TGW).

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of 25 studies were included. Fourteen articles were case reports or case series describing 21 TGW with PCa; 11 papers focused primarily on assessing the incidence or screening of PCa in TGW. The median (range) age of patients with PCa was 63 (45-78) years. Median (range) PSA at diagnosis was 7.5 (0.4-1710) ng/mL. Prostate biopsy detected ISUP 3-5 in 10 (67%) cases. T3-4 stages were described in 7 (64%) patients. Three (14.3%) cases of nodal involvement and 2 (9.5%) of metastases were reported at diagnosis. First-line therapy included radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation therapy in 14 (74 %) subjects. Median (range) follow-up was 24 (2-120) months. A good response to first-line therapy was recorded in 8 (47.1%) cases. Median (range) incidence of PCa in TGW was 44.1 (4.34-140) cases per 100,000 person-years. PCa was significantly less frequent in TGW than in cisgender males (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Risk of death after PCa diagnosis was significantly higher in TGW compared to cisgender males (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06-3.45). TGW had lower lifetime PSA rates (48% vs. 64.6%, p = 0.048) than cisgender males. Few cases of PCa in TGW are currently reported. PCa seems significantly less frequent in TGW than in cisgender males; however, some data suggest a possible higher mortality in this cohort. TGW appear to have less access to PSA testing than cisgender men.

Cancer screening and management in the transgender population: Review of literature and special considerations for gender affirmation surgery

BACKGROUND

Literature focused on cancer screening and management is lacking in the transgender population.

AIM

To action to increase contributions to the scientific literature that drives the creation of cancer screening and management protocols for transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of PubMed on January 5th, 2022, with the following terms: "TGNC", OR "transgender", OR "gender non-conforming", OR "gender nonbinary" AND "cancer screening", AND "breast cancer", AND "cervical cancer", AND "uterine cancer", AND "ovarian cancer", AND "prostate cancer", AND "testicular cancer", AND "surveillance", AND "follow-up", AND "management". 70 unique publications were used. The findings are discussed under "Screening" and "Management" categories.

RESULTS

Screening: Current cancer screening recommendations default to cis-gender protocols. However, long-term gender-affirming hormone therapy and loss to follow-up from the gender-specific specialties contribute to a higher risk for cancer development and possible delayed detection. The only known screening guidelines made specifically for this population are from the American College of Radiology for breast cancer. Management: Prior to undergoing Gender Affirmation Surgery (GAS), discussion should address cancer screening and management in the organs remaining in situ. Cancer treatment in this population requires consideration for chemotherapy, radiation, surgery and/or reconstruction. Modification of hormone therapy is decided on a case-by-case basis. The use of prophylactic vs aesthetic techniques in surgery is still debated.

CONCLUSION

When assessing transgender individuals for GAS, a discussion on the future oncologic risk of the sex-specific organs remaining in situ is essential. Cancer management in this population requires a multidisciplinary approach while the care should be highly individualized with considerations to social, medical, surgical and gender affirming surgery related specifications. Special considerations have to be made during planning for GAS as surgery will alter the anatomy and may render the organ difficult to sample for screening purposes. A discussion with the patient regarding the oncologic risk of remaining organs is imperative prior to GAS. Other special considerations to screening such as the conscious or unconscious will to unassociated with their remaining organs is also a key point to address. We currently lack high quality studies pertinent to the cancer topic in the gender affirmation literature. Further research is required to ensure more comprehensive and individualized care for this population.

Prostate cancer in transgender women: considerations for screening, diagnosis and management

Transgender individuals represent 0.55% of the US population, equivalent to 1.4 million transgender adults. In transgender women, feminisation can include a number of medical and surgical interventions. The main goal is to deprive the phenotypically masculine body of androgens and simultaneously provide oestrogen therapy for feminisation. In gender-confirming surgery (GCS) for transgender females, the prostate is usually not removed. Due to limitations of existing cohort studies, the true incidence of prostate cancer in transgender females is unknown but is thought to be less than the incidence among cis-gender males. It is unclear how prostate cancer develops in androgen-deprived conditions in these patients. Six out of eleven case reports in the literature presented with metastatic disease. It is thought that androgen receptor-mediated mechanisms or tumour-promoting effects of oestrogen may be responsible. Due to the low incidence of prostate cancer identified in transgender women, there is little evidence to drive specific screening recommendations in this patient subpopulation. The treatment of early and locally advanced prostate cancer in these patients warrants an individualised thoughtful approach with input from patients' reconstructive surgeons. Both surgical and radiation treatment for prostate cancer in these patients can profoundly impact the patient's quality of life. In this review, we discuss the evidence surrounding screening and treatment of prostate cancer in transgender women and consider the current gaps in our knowledge in providing evidence-based guidance at the molecular, genomic and epidemiological level, for clinical decision-making in the management of these patients.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Transgender Patients

CONTEXT

Approximately 0.4-1.3% of the worldwide population is transgender. Although the exact prevalence is unknown, there is an increase in open identification as transgender. Among transgender women (TW), the prostate is retained even after gender-affirmation surgery, thus necessitating ongoing screening for prostate cancer (CaP). However, little is known about CaP screening in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To assess our current understanding of CaP incidence and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in TW.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a nonsystematic narrative review of all PubMed publications through June 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Given the limited primary research on this subject, case reports were also included. Studies were reviewed to understand PSA screening practices and reports of CaP in this population, as applicable.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There is no consensus regarding PSA screening in TW from any of the major societies, and TW are largely absent from guidelines. Case report data suggest that TW with CaP may have more aggressive disease, and these cancers may have been pre-existing prior to present before gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) or be castrate-resistant.

CONCLUSIONS

We are in the infancy of our understanding of PSA screening in TW. Important avenues for future research include understanding the risks/benefits of PSA screening in TW, how best to mitigate potential negative psychological effects of PSA screening in TW, establishing baseline PSA values for those on GAHT (and determining what values should be considered "elevated"), establishing when to initiate PSA screening for those on GAHT, and establishing the accuracy of biomarkers for those undergoing GAHT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We examined patterns of prostate cancer screening for transgender women. Little is known about prostate cancer incidence or screening in this population. Additional research is needed to establish guidelines for screening in this population.

Prostate Cancer in Male-to-Female Transgender Individuals: Histopathologic Findings and Association With Gender-affirming Hormonal Therapy

Male-to-female (MtF) transgender individuals are at risk for prostate cancer, although guidelines for screening and management in this population are not well established. We describe a series of 9 MtF transgender patients who underwent prostate tissue sampling and highlight histopathologic features and challenges related to pathologic interpretation of prostate tissue in this patient population. Seven of 9 total patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer and all had elevated prostate-specific antigen at the time of diagnosis. Three of the 7 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer had received different types of hormone therapy for gender affirmation before the diagnosis of prostate cancer, and in all 3 of these patients, there was histologic evidence of hormone therapy effect in both benign prostate tissue and/or the adenocarcinoma. The 2 patients with benign prostate tissue underwent transurethral resection for lower urinary tract symptoms and were previously on hormone therapy for gender affirmation. Both of these specimens showed diffuse glandular atrophy and basal cell hyperplasia, indicative of hormone therapy effect on benign prostatic tissue. In the patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, a spectrum of grades was observed, ranging from Grade Group 1 to Grade Group 5. Four patients underwent radical prostatectomy, with 2 cases showing extraprostatic extension and Grade Group 5 prostatic adenocarcinoma, and 2 showing Grade Group 2 prostatic adenocarcinoma. Three of the 4 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy had received gender-affirming hormone therapy before surgery, and all 3 of these specimens showed hormone therapy effect in non-neoplastic prostate tissue and focal hormone therapy effect in prostatic adenocarcinoma. The presence of areas of viable carcinoma without hormone therapy effect enabled the assignment of a Gleason score and Grade Group in these 3 cases. Hormone therapy administered for gender identity affirmation induces histopathologic changes to both benign prostate tissue (nonkeratinizing squamous metaplasia, diffuse atrophy, basal cell hyperplasia, and stromal dominance with decreased numbers of glands) and prostatic adenocarcinoma (nuclear pyknosis, atrophy, cytoplasmic vacuolization, and architectural patterns that would qualify for Gleason 4 and 5 in the absence of hormone therapy effect) that have been traditionally seen in cis-male prostate cancer patients receiving hormone therapy. In the absence of hormone therapy, the morphology of prostatic adenocarcinoma in transgender patients shows classic morphologic features similar to those seen in cis-male patients not on hormone therapy. Prostate cancer with hormone therapy effect may not only be histologically quite subtle and may be overlooked if not suspected, but also should not be assigned a Gleason score because the Gleason score would substantially overstate its biologic potential. Therefore, similar to cis-male patients who have received androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer, transgender patients on hormone therapy for gender affirmation may be at risk for both underrecognition and over-grading of prostate cancer, particularly if the pathologist is not aware of the clinical history.

Prostate cancer in transgender women: what does a urologist need to know?

OBJECTIVE

To review of the existing literature, current guidelines and standard of practice related to prostate cancer in transgender women, as the transgender population share many of the same healthcare needs as their cisgender counterparts, but may have additional specialist needs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a non-systematic review of the literature, current guidelines and standard of practice related to prostate cancer in transgender women.

RESULTS

Our search revealed 10 case reports of prostate cancer in transgender women, four specialist opinion papers, six cohort studies, and four systematic reviews. The information in these publications were assimilated to produce a review of prostate cancer in transgender women.

CONCLUSION

The risk of prostate cancer in transgender women who are not on gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) or who have not had gender-affirming surgery (GAS) and gender non-conforming individuals (who may never commence GAHT or have GAS) is the same as that in the cis male population. In these patients, healthcare professionals need to be able to discuss screening, diagnostic and treatment options considering future wishes for gender-affirming treatment. Prostate cancer incidence in transgender women on GAHT or following GAS is lower than age-matched cis-male counterparts, but diagnosis and treatment is more nuanced. The present review discusses the existing literature about development and incidence of prostate cancer in this population, and makes recommendations about screening, the usefulness of diagnostic tools e.g. prostate-specific antigen and magnetic resonance imaging, and considerations when formulating treatment. Potential directions for future research are discussed, which will hopefully lead to development of robust evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer in transgender women.

Histologic Findings in Surgical Pathology Specimens From Individuals Taking Feminizing Hormone Therapy for the Purpose of Gender Transition: A Systematic Scoping Review

CONTEXT.—

Transgender women experience health disparities in all areas of medicine. Within surgical pathology, knowledge gaps relating to the concepts of transgender care exist. Medical transition for transgender women and transfeminine persons may involve hormone therapy and/or surgery to feminize the body. Understanding the common histologic changes in specimens from feminizing surgeries, as well as other specimens from patients on feminizing hormone therapy, will aid surgical pathologists in providing better care to this unique patient population.

OBJECTIVE.—

To summarize histologic findings in surgical pathology specimens from transgender women taking feminizing hormones.

DATA SOURCES.—

A systematic review of the OVID Medline and PubMed databases was performed to identify all studies describing histologic findings in surgical pathology specimens from transgender women from 1946 to 2019.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Much of the literature to date describing histologic findings in transgender women comes from the examination of genitourinary specimens removed during feminizing surgeries. Common benign changes associated with feminizing hormone therapy include the development of acini and lobules in the breast, testicular tubular changes, and squamous metaplasia of the prostate and urethra. Neoplastic cases include breast adenocarcinoma and fibroepithelial lesions, testicular germ cell tumors, prostatic adenocarcinoma, anal squamous cell carcinoma, pituitary adenomas, and meningiomas. Additional studies assessing the findings in other organ systems as well as population-based studies assessing rates of neoplasia are needed. However, future research relies on engagement within the surgical pathology community as well as collaboration with clinicians and patients to achieve optimal results.

Cancer Stage, Treatment, and Survival Among Transgender Patients in the United States

Background

Transgender persons face many barriers to health care that may delay cancer diagnosis and treatment, possibly resulting in decreased survival. Yet, data on cancer in this population are limited. We examined cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survival among transgender patients compared with cisgender patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

Methods

Gender (male, female, or transgender) was extracted from medical records from patients diagnosed with cancer between 2003 and 2016. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) for the associations between gender and stage at diagnosis and treatment receipt. Cox proportional hazards regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for associations between gender and all-cause survival.

Results

Among 11 776 699 persons with cancer in NCDB, 589 were transgender. Compared with cisgender patients, transgender patients may be more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage lung cancer (OR = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 3.28); be less likely to receive treatment for kidney (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.47) and pancreas (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.95) cancers; and have poorer survival after diagnosis with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.51 to 3.63), prostate (HR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.06 to 3.45), and bladder cancers (HR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.36 to 6.00). Similar associations were found for other cancer sites, although not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Transgender patients may be diagnosed at later stages, be less likely to receive treatment, and have worse survival for many cancer types. Small sample size hampered our ability to detect statistically significant differences for some cancer sites. There is a need for transgender-focused cancer research as the population ages and grows.

Prostate cancer in sexual minorities and the influence of HIV status

Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related death in men in the USA, but the effect of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment on men in a sexual minority group, including men who have sex with men and transgender women, is poorly understood. Efforts to study this population are complicated, as cancer registries do not routinely collect information on sexual orientation. As a result, epidemiological data regarding this population have come from small studies that have included disparate rates of prostate cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. Qualitative studies indicate that prostate cancer is experienced differently by sexual minorities, with distinct health-care needs that arise owing to differences in sexual practices, social support systems and relationships with the medical community. Notably, sexual minorities have been reported to experience poorer health-related quality of life outcomes than heterosexual men, and tend to have less robust social support systems, experience increased psychological distress caused by sexual dysfunction (areas of which are unmeasured after treatment), experience isolation within the health-care system and express increased levels of dissatisfaction with treatment. The incidence of prostate cancer actually seems to be decreased in men from sexual minorities living with HIV, despite there being no differences in screening and treatment, with poor cancer-specific mortality. Although the literature on patients with prostate cancer in men from sexual minority groups has historically been sparse, peer-reviewed research in this area has grown considerably during the past decade and has become an important field of study.

Cancer Risk in Transgender People

Gender-affirming hormonal treatment (HT) in transgender people is considered safe in general, but the question regarding (long-term) risk on sex hormone-related cancer remains. Because the risk on certain types of cancer differs between men and women, and some of these differences are attributed to exposure to sex hormones, the cancer risk may be altered in transgender people receiving HT. Although reliable epidemiologic data are sparse, the available data will be discussed in this article. Furthermore, recommendations for cancer screening and prevention will be discussed as well as whether to withdraw HT at time of a cancer diagnosis.

Gender-affirming hormone therapy and the risk of sex hormone-dependent tumours in transgender individuals-A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cancers are a leading cause of death worldwide, and transgender individuals are no exception. The effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) on sex hormone-dependent tumours are unclear. Therefore, this review seeks to determine whether tumour risk in transgender individuals differs from the general population, to guide clinical screening recommendations.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review based on the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies examining tumour incidence, prevalence or cancer-related mortality in transgender individuals. All English peer-reviewed publications were included if histological type and temporal relation to GAHT were reported. Case reports were included if there were ≥2 cases of the same histological type.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 307 studies. Excluding those that did not meet inclusion criteria, 43 studies (7 cohort studies, 2 cross-sectional studies and 34 case reports) were reviewed. Retrospective cohort studies suggest no increase in risk of tumour development in transgender individuals receiving GAHT compared to the general population. Notably, the mean ages of cohorts were young and were treated with GAHT for insufficient durations to assess tumour risk. Case reports raise potential associations between high-dose oestradiol and anti-androgen therapy with prolactinoma and meningioma, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Further longitudinal studies are required to assess the risk of GAHT and hormone-dependent tumour development. Until further evidence is available, tumour screening should be based on guidelines for the general population and the presence of organs in transgender individuals rather than gender identity or hormonal therapy status.